Rnnk , % 



NOTES 



"7X3 



AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 



By E. L. 



LONDON: 
HOU1STOK & WEIGHT, 

PATERNOSTER ROW. 
MDCOCLXIII. 



Ml 



7iJ 
'f 



N O.T E, 



This paper, -written in February, 1862, was forwarded to London for 
publication, but was unfortunately mislaid. 

Having been recovered, the author thinks it is still not too late to 
publish it in its original form. This sufficiently explains what may now 
appear anachronisms in the following pages, as well as the absence of any 
reference to events which have taken place, and to the progress of the 
lamentable struggle between North and South during the last year ; which, 
however, scarcely affect the general principles which he discusses. 

But this much may be added. The success of the Confederates in the 
field, against fearful odds — their devotion — their constancy — and courage 
and determination — contrasted, as these have been, with the vain-glorious 
boasting — the wretched failures — the fierce, cruel, vengeful, purblind, 
obstinate spirit and conduct of the North, have commanded the admiration 
of the world. This, together with the deeper insight which we have 
obtained into the real principles and purposes of the contending parties, 
have greatly modified, if not entirely changed the current of public opinion 
in this country. For, as every mail from America made it more and more 
manifest that the Confederates were fighting in defence of their own 
freedom, not for the maintenance of their " peculiar institution," and that 
President Lincoln and his supporters in the North were waging a bitter 
and aggressive war for domination, conquest, and revenge, and that the 
abolition of slavery was not a principal, or even a secondary object with 
them then, and it is not to be wondered that the sympathies of the British 
people, at first almost universally with the North, came to be almost as 
universally with the South ; and we are therefore now prepared to hail 
with something more than satisfaction, the issue of this fratricidal conflict, 
the establishment of the South as an independent State, — taking wise and 
effectual measures to root out the cancer of slavery from among them — an 
issue, which, to every dispassionate observer, is no longer a matter of doubt 3 
but merely of time. 



NOTES ON AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 



The more recent affairs of the United States have so much 
engaged the attention of the British nation, and been so 
much subjected to public discussion, that anything novel 
can hardly now be looked for ; yet there seems so much 
peculiar reticence in some quarters, and so much ex parte 
declamation in others, that a few desultory remarks on 
some of the prominent topics belonging to this subject may 
not be superfluous. 

It is astonishing to observe how much ignorance, bigotry, 
and declamation, have on both sides characterized the dis- 
cussion of the slave question. The very attempt to reason 
on principles advanced by slavery advocates, has been 
sneered at or scolded down as a tampering with infidelity, 
tyranny, or vice. Every consideration but that which 
contains invective and reprobation, has been tabooed. Yet 
we condescend to argue calmly with the subtle Brahmin 
on his Shaster vagaries — with the credulous Jew on his 
cabalistic phantasms — with the Mahometan on his spurious 
miracles and persecuting spirit — and with the Sceptic on his 
sciolisms — why not be equally patient and dispassionate 
with the slave-owner on his " Institution," prejudice, or 
peculiar views, which are deeply ingrained in his nature 



6 



from birth and education ? And the subject is admittedly 
of vast importance, imperiously demanding calm and 
truthful examination. It might at least blunt our acri- 
mony, and inculcate moderation in its treatment, to reflect 
that it was the mother country — England — that first in- 
flicted the scourge of Slavery on her American colonists, 
contrary to their wishes and remonstrances, and to the 
neglect of which are to be attributed many of the horrors 
they are now suffering. 

If Slavery existed nowhere else but in the Southern 
States of America, the fact that there alone live more than 
four millions of slaves, and eight millions of whites — the lot 
of both, for weal or woe, inextricably bound up together — 
should make us pause before committing ourselves to hasty 
and dogmatical generalization. This conduct seems partly 
to have arisen from losing sight of general principles, and 
wandering into collateral and extraneous ones, such as 
controverted passages of Scripture — comparisons of the 
temporal state of slaves with the lower population of free 
countries, etc. 

If we are to begin to argue with the abettors of Slavery, 
it must be on principles acknowledged by both sides. 
Presuming, then, that both are influenced by reason and 
sound Christianity, we assent that, abstractedly speaking — 

1st j Slavery, so called, is an object which (paradoxical as 
it may appear) as a whole, is unattainable. It can only 
reach one-half of a human being — his body ; it cannot con- 
trol the soul, however much the futile attempt to compass 
this, may indirectly torture, pervert, and degrade it. 
Thought is free. 

2nd, Man being a responsible creature, and, as such, 
endowed by his Maker with one of his divine attributes — 
Free-will ; to attempt forcibly to control this, to the extent 



7 



which Slavery implies, is to defeat the end of his being, 
and avowedly to oppose the will of God, 

3rd, The command of the Savionr is to " do unto others 
as we would have them do to us," and this is expressly 
disobeyed by treating a man as a slave. 

If these three propositions alone were admitted and acted 
upon, they would cut up Slavery in Christian nations by the 
root. And they are admitted by slave-owners in the 
American States, with this serious qualification, however, 
that they are not applicable to the negro. They assert he 
is not a man, in the usual sense of the word, but a different 
species — a permanent variety — or a hybrid with the ape— 
or some such hypothesis. But zoological or ethnological 
opinions of this sort cannot avail ; they are unproved ; and, 
even with the assumption that the negro's intellect, at least 
in social and political aspects, may not be equal to that of 
the white, it cannot in calm reason be denied, that all the 
essential and specific attributes of human nature are pos- 
sessed by him. If his mind be supposed to be of lower 
grade, this is only an additional argument to treat him 
with the greater tenderness and care, as not being equally 
able with the white to protect, and legislate for, himself. 

As to abolition : we must look at things as we find them. 
Now, here we perceive ourselves in presence of four millions 
of slaves, and eight millions of free men. It is not the ques- 
tion, why there comes to be so many slaves, or why and how 
Slavery was introduced here, but what is to be done with 
the slaves ? Immediate emancipation, it is only necessary to 
mention, one would think, to denounce it. Then, for the 
interest and welfare of both parties, what is to be done ? 
I should suppose the most thorough-going Abolitionist, if 
he had the power, and, at the same time, the awful respon- 
sibility of decision, would pause to consider the practical 



8 



and immediate solution of so complex and formidable a 
problem. If the Southerns formed an independent State, it 
is probable that, left to themselves, untortured by the 
attacks and objurgations of strangers, feeling their respon- 
sibility in the eyes of Christendom, and, at the same time, 
conscious of their limited power, they would spontaneously 
slacken the fetters of the negro, and introduce ameliorations 
that would pave the way to abolition. A few steps they 
might take in such a case, safe as it would seem for them- 
selves, and of the highest importance to the slave. For 
example, legalize marriage, and prohibit separation of 
families — make them adstricta glebce, unless under the 
sacred sanction of a court of justice ; prepare a code of 
equitable and beneficent laws for their benefit, and appoint 
independent stipendiary magistrates to watch over their 
execution; and educate them prospectively for future 
sound and safe freedom. 

It is quite clear, even from the fact of secession alone, 
that the South has no fear of a negro insurrection, which, 
if it were practicable, they were sure their enemies at 
the North, sooner or later, would organize; and this feeling 
must chiefly have arisen from their conviction, well or ill 
founded, that, on the whole, they have not been ill-treated; 
and the fact of the steady increase of the coloured popula- 
tion, from natural causes, is certainly a strong indication 
of this being the truth. Nor must it be forgotten, while we 
talk so loudly of the welfare of the blacks, that we ought to 
have, at the least, equal regard to the safety and welfare of 
the whites; and, in all our arguments and views with 
regard to Slavery in the South, we must remember that we 
have to deal with a free, intelligent, and high-spirited 
people, over whom we have no political power, nor can 
assert any intellectual superiority ; and who, while they 



9 



may yield to courteous persuasion, or just and kind remon- 
strance, will never submit to dictation or invective. 

But Slavery, lamentable and deplorable as it is to the slave, 
and not a little so in the end, even to his owner, is not the 
culmination of the misery of the slave. The Slave Trade 
bears that horrible distinction. To trace this hellish traffic 
from its beginning to its end, is to harrow up the feelings 
of the most stoical of mankind, except those outcasts of 
humanity, who are engaged in and profit by it. And what 
has hindered this atrocious traffic — which even icy hearted 
cupidity dare not attempt to defend, whatever it may do 
with its relative slavery — from being hunted with execra- 
tion from the ocean, but, in this respect, the unreasonable, 
impractical and selfish Government of the United States. 
But for their sordid and factious complicity, this murderous 
manstealing — condemned alike by the laws of God and 
man — would long since have been exterminated. Their ag 
and finances have been its pabulum and protection. Al- 
though passing a law in their Congress, constituting it Piracy, 
they perversely refused under penalty of war, to permit any 
vessel bearing their flag, even though suspected of being a 
slaver, to be boarded and examined — thus converting their 
law into shame and derision, and their national banner into 
an aegis of brutality and crime. And did the North, when 
Congress was freed from the presence of its Southern 
members, give the world proof of its sincerity to suppress 
this evil, by yielding the right of search to other nations 
which they were anxious to grant to it. No, not a word or 
a hope was uttered on the subject. Visions of the re-estab- 
lishment of the Union were floating before them, and com- 
promises and " Fugitive Laws " might to this end become 
essential. They had even withdrawn every war vessel of 
their slave squadron, and left their^duties and treaties to be 



10 



fulfilled by the ships of other powers, without even^ro tern- 
pore giving them the right to search. And yet this is the state 
for which we reserve all our political courtesy, and partial 
neutrality ! our rage against slavery is so intense, that we 
forget there is such a trifle as the Slave Trade. 

The Government of Mr. Lincoln it is true, has lately, for 
the first time since the law of piracy was long ago enacted, 
followed out its sanctions, by executing a man of the name 
of Gordon, the Captain of a slaver, as a sort of peace-offer- 
ing to appease the indignation of the civilised world. But 
until the test of truth and earnestness is displayed, and 
the cordial and untrammelled right of search — not for a few 
years only as has quite recently been done, but without 
limitation — is yielded for so sacred a purpose to other nations 
no sacrifices of this description, can ever create confidence 
or eradicate suspicion. 

This detestable traffic should be constituted piracy by every 
Christian nation— the mutual right of search for slaves, alone, 
should be without exception, and if the American Govern- 
ment, whether United or Divided, will not agree to this, it 
should be compelled to submit — no nation has a right to 
outrage human nature. 

In connection with this subject of the Negro which we 
have been considering, we shall shortly allude to another 
not a little interesting. If the pestilential marshes and 
burning Lowlands of the Tropics are to be cultivated, it 
must be, it would seem, by the coloured races ; nature ap- 
pears to say so by exactly adapting the one to the other. 
And yet how is this to be accomplished without the skill 
and the guidance of the white man ? Such an influence 
and power does not necessarily imply Slavery, though it 
might to a certain degree involve a regulated and mild 
coercion. However we may stickle about freedom it is im- 



11 



possible to believe that the same law unmodified, can at 
present apply to a Bechuana and a Briton. Are not the 
idle able bodied poor compelled in England to work, or food 
withheld ; as the Apostle St. Paul says, " If a man will not 
work neither shall he eat." And, though protesting against 
slavery, the sufferings to which it subjects its victims, and 
the vices and penalties to which it condemns the slave 
owner, it is impossible to conceive how the injunction of 
the Creator to cultivate and replenish the earth can, in the 
<?ase of the Equatorial regions, ibe carried out unless the 
body of the Black and the brain of the White, be combined 
to effect it. Without this, the most lovely and fruitful lands 
of the earth must be abandoned to the brute and the Savage. 

In comparing the acts and views of the contending parties 
of the North and South, we find them of the South pro- 
claiming, that they secede from the Union, based on Free 
will, because their interests, feelings, and a desire for national 
independence impel them to it, and they wish to accomplish 
this in peace. The North desires to compel the South by 
war to remain in the Union — no longer founded in concord 
and free will — but on force and subjection. It too has its views 
of interest and ambition, such as, high tariffs obviously to 
favour its own manufactures, and to oblige the South to 
trade with it alone — to acquire valuable investments in slave 
property — and to wield the whole political power of the 
Union and enjoy the consequent possession of all prizes 
of patronage and emolument. Nor is it merely the South 
which the North is so anxious to bring back to the motherly 
embrace of the abstraction called " Union." It is the des- 
potic control of all the rivers and highways, and of all 
unoccupied or uncivilised territory in North America, as 
well as what may be gained by future Filibustering. The 
South, at least at present, is satisfied with its territory, and 



12 



wars defensively. The North is not, and wars offensively. 
Both seek their selfish interests ; but the one would attain 
them without dictating to the other — the other, by unjusti- 
fiable and forcible means. If there were, at this moment 
no slavery in the South, it can hardly be doubted, that the 
same mutual alienation and dislike would exist. The two 
powers are not formed for amalgamation but separation. 
Enlarged statesmanship should have understood Union as 
a provision to subserve only a temporary purpose. Every- 
thing tended as the States advanced in population and power, 
to disunion, as we now fatally perceive. The possessions 
of the states are already far too large to be adequately 
governed by a weak central Executive, and it could never 
be stronger while state governments and democratical re- 
presentative principles were present to restrain it. It was 
never capable of fusing all the discordant elements and 
various races and states into one homogeneous mass. On 
the contrary, the principle there, is division — and to this 
principle in a great measure is to be ascribed the advance- 
ment of the people. 

The North is going against the law of Individualism, 
which, both in state and person, is a main distinction of 
America. The selfish independent energy is too strong for 
a united compact empire — the centrifugal force is far too 
strong for the centripetal. The principle of their govern- 
ment has hitherto been that of the inverted pyramid — the 
many ruling the few — contrary to reason, experience, and 
analogy. When the majority of mankind attains sufficient 
intelligence, integrity, and independence, then only can such 
a principle be admitted, as the fundamental law of the 
political constitution. 

There is ample territory in North America for many 
States, and it is their interest, and the interest of mankind, 



13 



that it should be divided in many. The Northerners con- 
template their dominion over the whole continent of the 
two Americas, and that they shall direct a power whose 
ukase shall rule or ruin the world. 

Have they not sufficiently large possessions already? 
Can they find any difficulty in defining boundary lines, or 
in employing themselves in adjusting by anticipation pro- 
bable disputes of future change and extension, as they might 
arise ? Much more easily and profitably than engaging in 
their present broils and outrages. Can they not settle 
down to peaceful independence, and content themselves with 
the enviable and prosperous position they might now hold, 
without ruining themselves and their brethren by unavailing, 
disastrous, and merciless combats, and eternally coveting the 
dominions of other States ? If these be their present prac- 
tices and aspirations, what would they be with vastly greater 
power, when the undisguised aim of these humble-minded 
and gentle republicans should be gratified, and their grasp 
extend from Labrador to Cape Horn, with all the islets 
and icebergs thereto belonging — not even excepting the 
transatlantic dominions of the David of their Jonathan — 
the Czar of Oonalaska. 

There does exist evidently in the people and country of 
North America the materials of a great future race, but 
there is a want of the element of political cohesion to mould 
them into one great empire. Neither mutual attraction nor 
compulsion ah extra is to be found ; every one is for him- 
self. While the illimitable extent of productive, unpossessed 
wilderness, invites interminable migration, and calls into 
full play individual energy, which is pernicious, at least in 
the first instance, to the production of order, subordination, 
social qualities, and local attachments, — the recluse and 
squatter habits are apt to degenerate into those of the 
savage. 



14 



In any view, however, it is a mistake to consider slavery 
as the great stumbling-block between the North and South. 
There was no interference whatever by the general Govern- 
ment and Congress with the laws of the Southern States in 
regard to that question, and that none was meant, was 
offered to be guaranteed to them, and very possibly would 
be so still, though, indeed it may be alleged, that each 
belligerent distrusts the promises and engagements of the 
other. Moreover, the South had the whole power of the 
supreme government actually exerted in favour of their 
" Institution" over the whole States, in the memorable and 
merciless fugitive law, which indeed was no dead letter to 
them, whatever memento mori it might have been to the poor 
negro. If slavery did not now exist in the South, still dis- 
like and hatred between it and the North have arisen. There 
are sufficiently varied and powerful elements of strife — 
personal, commercial, geographical, and political — to rend 
asunder now, or at a near future period, the Union, and the 
late proposition of Mr Lincoln, of a pecuniary arrangement 
for emancipation, while it may be taken as a voluntary 
admission of the danger and difficulty of the struggle, seems 
to argue either a want of knowledge of the true causes of 
hostility, or a mere subtle artifice of policy. 

We may reason and speculate generally on slavery, but 
the total want of personal experience and individual sym- 
pathy with the feelings and ideas of slaveholders, greatly 
deprives our views of accuracy and authority. The aboli- 
tion party in the North comprises a very small number of 
its inhabitants, yet if any people under the sun might be 
supposed best to see the nature of the evils of the system 
in the South, it must be the North ; how happens it, then, 
that there are so few who are zealously determined to 
abolish it, or found to treat with kindness the coloured 



15 



people that may reside there, whatever novelists may say to 
the contrary ? Either it is not so bad, or more difficult to 
deal with, than we imagine ; or else the moral susceptibili- 
ties of the North are comparatively effete. 

Yet the mistaken belief that slavery was the main point 
of dispute between the North and South, is the cause that 
has all along obscured and distorted our conception of the 
nature and consequences of the disastrous war, so ominously 
reminding us of the turbulence and passions of the French 
Eevolution, that has been going on between them — a war, it 
is true, not, at least at first, characterized by bloodshed, but 
still these bunkum battlings have not the less been ruinous 
to their finances, to future peace, and to the vital interests 
of other nations. It is this belief, that the men of the 
North were the champions of liberty, and those of the 
South the abettors of the " Institution," that so long led the 
British press and public to take so marked an interest in 
the success of the former, and. though professing neutrality, 
to lean to that side; for we cannot deny, that even when 
the battle of Manassas had proved that the South could 
maintain its ground, we recognised a blockade we knew was 
inefficient, and thus conceded an immense advantage to the 
one party, as contrasted with the other; because naval 
warfare was the chief point on which the North was, from 
the first, superior, and, if not the only, was the main means 
by which they could hope for ultimate success. To the 
same purblind view, must also be ascribed the neglect of 
the important consideration, that the South, and not the 
North, is our natural customer and friend. We were doing 
everything that circumstances admitted of, at least nega- 
tively, for the North, and yet they were pouring out against 
us the most envenomed tirades, apt to insult us, and 
clamorous for war. Not even their admission that their 



16 



legal blockade was nugatory, by sinking stone-fleets to 
destroy the Southern harbours, and thereby displaying reck- 
less hostility to friendly nations, by depriving their ships 
of harbours of refuge, could draw us from our ex parte neu- 
trality. Acts of lawless outrage these, defended not because 
they were just or even politic, but because they suited their 
selfishness at the time, arid had before been done by others 
in periods of despotic barbarism and cruelty. 

We also, in our code of neutrality, affect to cast aside 
the vital question to which the South so urgent!} appeals, 
as proving their right of being recognised as independent — 
the doctrine of Stat- Eights. Yet we act on the construction 
applied to it by their antagonists, in understanding the 
Union to be one and indivisible. On the broad principle 
asserted by all the States, the will of the people is the 
only source of power and title to govern. This aloDe, and 
divested of all special pleading and technicality, gives each 
a power to secede from the other, as it did originally to 
unite with them, and a better title too, than the whole had 
to secede from Great Britain, when they were merely 
colonies and dependencies, not separate and independent 
States. Suppose every State but New York and Massa- 
chusets had chosen to secede, would Mr Seward still have 
maintained his Fetish doctrine that these two States were 
" the Union," and the rest " rebels V as he childishly terms 
8,000,000 persons, possessing a rich and enormous territory, 
composed of thirteen separate States, with their governments 
as enlightened as his own ? Yet the principle is the same. 
Nor is there a word said in the framing of their constitu- 
tion, that a majority shall have, in such a contingency, 
absolute and indefeasible power over a minority. To think 
that a Federal alliance of free democratical States are to be 
eternally tied together by a parchment band, when no 



17 



penalty is attached to secession, and then to be persecuted 
with fire and sword, because they wish peacefully to with- 
draw from this connection, seems a monstrous perversion of 
the words freedom and free-will, and another mode of pro- 
claiming that " Might makes right." 

We are frequently admonished that if we aid or coun- 
tenance the South, we should be fostering slavery, because 
forsooth, slavery is there established. How, then, came we 
to help Eussia against the first Napoleon — the French hav- 
ing no slaves, and Eussia thirty millions ! Politically 
speaking, we have nothing to do with the constitution of a 
country in our national relations with it. We might wish 
Turkey to be Christian instead of Mahometan — Spain to be 
Protestant instead of bigotedly Popish, just as we might 
wish the Southern States would abolish slavery ; but that 
is apart from the present question. It is no part of our 
duty as a nation to carry on a crusade in favour of Negro 
slaves. But are we sure, if the North should triumph, that 
our protegees the negroes will be better off with a Fugitive 
Law more stringent than before ; or with immediate eman- 
cipation, which might be equivalent to letting loose four 
millions of savages on a civilized people. 

In considering the relations of the United States, or rather 
of the North to other countries, and especially to England, 
we ought to remind ourselves of a truism, which, trite and 
simple as it is, we have too long kept out of sight — that 
" boasting is not power." They hold up to us the extent of 
their mercantile marine, and bid us see in that their equality 
with us in naval strength. But a merchant navy, and a 
war navy, are not convertible terms. Look at the extent of 
the German commercial marine, compared with that of 
France, and even of Denmark, yet see the disparity in naval 



18 



strength. Americans boast of their military exploits and 
glory, and bid us look at their wars with Mexico and 
England. The enemy to be coped with in the former case 
was a contemptible one, not even a match for wild Comanches. 
Moreover, it was the new military weapon, which the Mex- 
icans had not, the revolver, that was the chief means of 
victory. The history of their first revolutionary struggle 
with England has yet to be written impartially. It was 
waged at every disadvantage to England — distance from 
home — adverse climate — comparative uselessness of regular 
troops in that which was most decisive — guerilla and bush 
fighting, besides the active assistance to the revolted col- 
onies, furnished by France, Spain, and Holland — these 
were the causes of the success of which the Yankees are 
so proud. And, again, in the last war with Britain, what 
did we see ? England was warring against the whole of 
Europe ; and that was the time when the people who can 
"whip creation" chose to assail her. "England's weak- 
ness — America's opportunity," is not the motto that chival- 
rous valour would adopt. Three or four of our weak 
frigates, poorly manned, were taken or sunk by American 
line-of-battle ships> miscalled " frigates," much superior in 
sailing qualities, in weight, and number of guns, and in the 
complement of their crews ; of these crews, moreover, 
many, and those the most warlike, were composed of dis- 
contented Englishmen, forced from their country by the 
ruthless pressgang. Yet, wherever anything like equality 
occurred, we know what happened — to the Chesapeake, the 
Essex, and the Argus. And where on land was the proof of 
soldiership ? Defeat and capture by wholesale of their 
armies invading Canada. At New Orleans, when the 
British were repulsed, it was not the talent or courage of 
the Americans that was displayed, but the rashness of the 



19 



English commander, sacrificing his men to the rifles of 
their enemies, who were safely entrenched "behind cotton 
bags — and thus taking the bull by the horns, as' was also 
foolishly done at Bunker's HilL 

We allow ourselves to slide too easily into the delusion, 
originated and fostered by the American press, that their 
higher class citizens are all " Washingtons," and the lower 
"Hawkeyes." Their novelists, newspapers, and "know- 
nothings," have so rung the changes on their national glori- 
fication, that people seem to have indolently taken it for 
granted, that they are what they assert themselves to be— 
a great and a good people, advocates of all right, and in- 
domitable enemies of all wrong. How otherwise than 
under some such delusion, could for a moment have been 
listened to, except with a smile of astonishment and ridicule, 
what is called the " Monroe doctrine" whereby they would 
autocratically proclaim themselves the despotic arbiters of 
all America — proscribe the acquirement of a foot of soil on 
that continent by every other power, as interloping usurpers, 
and ignore the facts that Britain had an empire there, and 
that the French and others had possessions in America, ac- 
quired centuries before their own separation from the mother 
country. They acknowledge no public law but what suits 
themselves. Passion and boasting are their favourite moods 
of mind — power and pelf the objects of their adulation. 
Faction and ambition are the guides of their statemanship, 
and the trickery of hucksters their diplomacy, of which the 
suppression of the map (decisive of the question of boun- 
dary in favour of England) by Webster, in his negociation 
with Lord Ashburton, was an instance. In their foreign 
disputes they decline arbitration, when they fear justice ; 
they refuse the right of search, because it would annihilate 
the slave trade. They keep boundary questions unsettled, 



20 



that a door may be kept open for threats of hostility, to 
favour intrigue or party spirit. They do all in their power 
to sap the loyalty of Ireland and our colonies, and talk un- 
blushingly of annexing them. What would Mr Seward 
say, if Lord Kussell were to return the compliment, with 
reference to Maine and Oregon ? On the least shadow of 
dispute or misapprehension with England, they instantly 
threaten war. They call rebellion from the mother country 
a glorious heroic revolution, and unfairly judge all its ante- 
cedents and concomitants, not by the light of the eighteenth, 
but that of the nineteenth century. They contemptuously 
rejected the humane invitation of the nations to relinquish 
privateering, when it seemed a winning game for them to 
play — the instant it appears the opposite, without being at 
the pains to assign any other reason, they unblushingly 
adopt the proposal. 

The affair of the Trent brought out into strong relief, the 
salient points of the character of this people, their unrea- 
sonable selfishness, vain glory, hatred of England, indispo- 
sition to submit to the laws of equity, and a shrinking back 
from all their false pretences, when boldly met. Had the 
disposition of their government been frank and friendly, 
that contretemps could not have happened ; or, happening, 
could not have been endorsed by the people as it was. A 
kindly honourable power would not for a moment have 
smiled upon an act which it knew England would receive 
as an insult, whether rigid law permitted it or not. 

One of their habits of diplomacy with us has been, to 
demand, in matters of dispute, a great deal more than they 
had a right to ; and then, by affecting to yield a little, gain 
more than they had a title to expect. If we were to follow 
their example of denying asseverations, and casuistically 
inferring motives, we might say that the American Govern- 



21 



ment had directed Captain Wilkes to commit the outrage 
on the Trent, for the purpose of expending any war feelings 
in England on a trivial point, which could, when they 
pleased, be easily explained away, and thus place an 
obstacle in the way of our acknowledging the independence 
of the Southern Confederacy, from our [indisposition to re- 
awaken hostile sentiments. 

Had England been influenced by no higher motives, in- 
terest alone "would have led her to recognise the South, and 
disallow a buckram blockade, and then the Union would 
have been instantly dissevered. 

Although the whole conduct of Great Britain to the United 
States, and more particularly to the North, has been con- 
ciliatory and forbearing, the most outrageous clamour and 
abuse, have been recklessly hurled against her. Every 
motive of her conduct has for a series of years been studi- 
ously perverted. When she emancipates her slaves, it is 
with the insidious object of ruining slave property in 
America — When she urges the suppression of the slave- 
trade, it has the selfish object of benefiting her own slave 
colonies. When she is obliged to coerce a tyrannical Eajah, 
she is yielding to the inveterate imperiousness of her dis- 
position. When she punishes the cunning and treachery 
of China, she is ambitiously aiming at its subjugation. 
When she represses crime in Ireland, she is a persecuting 
unrelenting bigot. When, for the sake of peace, she yields 
to American bluster, she is cowardly ; and when she calmly 
maintains her rights, she is insolent and unjust. They 
repudiate her courtesies equally with her pecuniary loans. 
JFor friendly considerate neutrality, they vow undying 
vengeance. " Odisse quern laeseris." England is the scape- 
goat for all their angry and malevolent passions — the cause 
of all their evils ; and yet this is the people to be hugged 



to her bosom, with the affectionate yearnings of kindred, 
while they are showing, on every occasion, the inveterate 
hatred of family discord ! These the loyal " cousins" to 
stand by us in the hour of national peril, when we know, 
that if there is a people in the world that would rejoice in 
the downfall of Britain, it is the American of the North— 
they who are ever in the front rank of our enemies, when- 
ever we are in perplexity or danger from other nations — 
who, in 1812, suddenly declared war against us, while we 
were combating Europe, and persisted in it though the 
casus "belli, the orders in council, were instantly rescinded— 
a nation who, in the face of every obvious principle of 
political economy, forms protective tariffs that must operate 
chiefly against Britain, and commits itself to perpetual 
jealousy and rivalry ! 

This bad feeling is not of yesterday, it is not now first 
shown, when, as a nation, they are run mad, in the heat of 
civil broil and furious passions ; but it has, on the contrary, 
characterised them for a long period. They have nurtured 
a pre-disposition to hostility, and every act of sudden con- 
tact, or apparent difference of opinion, calls forth " indigna- 
tion meetings," and war manifestoes. 

In prominent relief to this is their conduct to other 
powers, with the exception of Spain, with which it suits 
their grasping views on Cuba to maintain a fretful aggressive 
spirit, and whose weakness emboldens their cupidity. What 
has been their studied politeness to France, and obtrusive 
blandishments to Bussia ? Curious enough it is, to notice 
this favouritism to Bussia, and scape-goatism to England. 
Contrasted amiabilities ! proceeding from the same elevated 
mental proclivity, though leading to very opposite results. 
But who that is capable of observation does not see in all 
this what our conduct ought to be to such a people — a spirit 



23 



of caution and watchfulness, and a determination to treat 
them just as they deserve- — never to permit the least infringe- 
ment of our obvious rights, or to place ourselves in the slight- 
est degree of dependence on them, either commercially or 
politically — to treat them simply with the justice, courtesy, 
and forbearance, that becomes us to all enlightened and 
Christian powers, and let them follow their own course. 
Every concession is only construed into evidence of weak- 
ness, and leads to fresh aggression, so that for their sakes, as 
well as for our own, it is our duty to eschew this. 

They might have followed a more intelligent and noble 
career. They might have been proud rather than jealous 
of their ancient mother country, from which they have 
derived eveiythmg they chiefly boast of, and the common 
glory of which they have inherited ; and they ought to 
have rejoiced in, instead of being envious of her eminence 
among the nations. It was in reality their interest, as well 
as their duty, to cultivate with us relations of intimacy and 
alliance. The struggle of the revolution had left them 
victorious and independent, and, as the winning party, they 
could afford to forget mutual animosities. The French 
colonists of Canada, the Dutch of the Cape, still look with 
filial partiality on France and Holland ; but such kindly 
sentiments are alien to the surly red-man nature of these 
assuming republicans. Strange, though almost every name 
of eminence America can pride herself upon is British, 
hardly a solitary instance can be found of a Federal 
American being able to look calmly at present circum- 
stances, or to be dispassionate or manly enough to do jus- 
tice to England, so hood- winked are they, or so fearful of 
the violent enmity of party, or the aboriginal amenity of 
Lynch law ; and their keenest apologists are their greatest 
slanderers, when they admit that a truculent mob and 



24 



licentious press rule the nation. What matters it to other 
countries that there are (what indeed will never be disputed) 
sterling Christian gentlemen and able men among them, in 
all ranks of society, if they have no influence or moral 
courage ? But it is to be feared that the last decades of 
years have not witnessed an improvement in the national 
character, or tested favourably their political constitution, 
while they have brought into salient caricature relief some 
of the rougher and more disagreeable features of their old, 
blended with some of those peculiar to their new country- 
men, the aboriginal Eedskins. And this half-caste physiog- 
nomy, however it may account for some peculiar phenomena, 
presents anything but an amiable and unclouded aspect. 
Jeffrey, of Edinburgh, long ago made the remark, that there 
was something singularly wild in the eye of United States 
men, and a noli me tangere suspicious look, is -too often the 
prominent feature of the countenance, betraying rather the 
swaggering littleness of conscious inferiority, than the calm 
dignity of inherent power — the mien of the parvenu rather 
than the patrician. 

In the deportment of the Confederate States towards us, 
since their lamentable agitations commenced, though we 
have unaccountably looked on them with coldness and re- 
serve, we have remarked a very different spirit, and this is 
apt to excite the impression, that the mantle of persistent 
and unprovoked alienation and hostility, which has been 
so long the diagnostic uniform of the Washington Govern- 
ment, has in the North had its home and its shrine. 

But is it refreshing and satisfactory to stand still and see 
a high-spirited people struggling for national independence 
crushed to death by a domineering and hated enemy? 
Have we forgotten our English love of fair play — our sym- 
pathy for the weaker side ? Weaker the South undoubtedly is, 



25 



in wealth — numbers — munitions of war — deprived of inter- 
course with other countries by a cruel and barbarous 
blockade, that allows them no foreign aid — hardly any in- 
telligence from them, but what is filtered through the fal- 
lacious medium of their antagonists' reports, though we might 
have had reliable information, if we had placed " Correspon- 
dents" with their armies as well as with the others — hardly 
aware of the existence of England, but by a negative and 
ambiguous neutrality, oppressive and hostile in its effects 
only to them — their coloured population a source of anxiety, 
perhaps alarm, rather than of military strength — the invad- 
ed not the invaders — involuntary not voluntary warfare. We 
lavished our good wishes on Poland — Belgium — Hungary 
— Circassia — Italy — have we none to spare for 8 millions 
of people mostly our own descendants, inhabiting a splendid 
country many times larger than our own Britain ? We may 
not perhaps actively interpose in this fratricidal quarrel — 
the fashionable doctrine of non-intervention, which warbles 
so thrillingly from the tongues of amateur jurisconsults, 
may forbid this, but can we find no kindness — no sym- 
pathy — aye, admiration for the noble and gallant bearing of 
the South, in the agonies and perils of her national travail ? 
Whatever she may have thought of our attitude towards 
her, she seems comparatively to have withheld invective, 
and to have sustained her difficult and dangerous position 
with a dignity, ability, and manliness, to which we have 
been far from doing adequate justice. 

Perhaps the governments of France and England distrust 
the amicable spirit of the South, and her ability to achieve 
her independence. But who need doubt her amicable and 
pacific spirit, when we reflect how essential this is to her 
interest and safety ; and who that remembers the successful 
resistance of Holland for so many years against the whole 



26 

might of Spain, can imagine that, with fortitude and pru- 
dence, the South will not now, or shortly hereafter, work 
out her own deliverance. 

The only thing we can pretend to say against her is, that 
slavery is there established ; but this is a point of domestic 
arrangement with which we have no right to meddle ; nor 
is it a novelty, or affecting us more than other nations, with 
whom we maintain friendly and commercial intercourse, 
whether slave States or free. 

Against the Federal North, however, we have to be very 
vigilantly on our guard, and, by never trusting to them, we 
shall escape many panics, repudiations, and emigrations; 
and turn our attention to our noble co]onies, that can sup- 
ply us with everything the globe can produce. What they 
mostly require from us is men, audi these we have been pas- 
sively and suicidally allowing to be furnished by us to our 
dear hostile relatives. Especially should we look to our 
American possessions, on which this turbulent and ambi- 
tious people have never ceased to cast their acquisitive long- 
ings, and exhibit their lupine pretexts for war. It is enough 
for them to fancy a country as convenient for them to pos- 
sess, to use every art to compass this. Their doings in 
central America, Mexico, and Cuba, are proofs of this. This 
wicked desire to grasp, by any means, even the most un- 
justifiable, the unchallenged possessions of other nations, as 
enlightened as themselves, is not however to be confounded 
with the making use for the advancement of civilization, of 
wildernesses roamed over only by savages and wild beasts — 
though it is not improbable that this principle recklessly 
applied to the country of the red Indian, has educated the 
white American to his national lust for colossal annexation. 

Some politicians there are amongst ourselves, who one- 
sidedly and sordidly regard colonies only as sources of ex- 



27 



pense to us, they restrict their views to financial estimates. 
The nation pays these, it is true, but does it get no valuable 
return, in their enormous markets rapidly increasing, in 
their facilities for reciprocally useful emigration, and the 
prospective advantages of mutual alliance and strength ? 
Why not attach them all still more to us, by giving them a 
share of our parliamentary representation? Could four or 
five new members in the House of Commons from all these 
splendid young empires produce any effect but a salutary- 
one in our national councils, or any upsetting of organic 
constitutional balance. What has become of the states- 
man-like view of this subject, once so favoured by many 
of our public men of all parties — Lord Derby among 
: the rest — that colonial representation is an act of justice 
to them, a bond of union with England? Why not 
also confer on some of their citizens titles of rank, 
which many of them well deserve, and earnestly listen 
to every suggestion for their honour and prosperity with 
the most prompt and practical solicitude? The postal 
communication with Australia — the judicious arrange- 
ments of the relations of the Cape Colony with the trans- 
orange Dutch boors — the extension of the Trunk line 
railway of Canada to Halifax, are among the prominent and 
immediate objects of attention ; while Canada should 
abandon her inexpedient and impolitic course of high im- 
port duties, and set herself heartily to work in improving 
her defensive resources. America talks of conquering 
Canada — let her rather look to retaining Maine. Our last 
war with her was one of defence. If the British Govern- 
ment had done its duty, it should not have ended it, without 
the cession of a convenient Atlantic sea-port for Canada; 
and, in any future rupture, this should be kept in view as a 
sine qua non, and then some boundary definitions, and red 



28 



lines on maps, would have to be adjusted, which might per- 
haps produce a little revulsion in her doctrines of aggrandize- 
ment. Their intention is not attempted to be concealed — 
it is unbiushingly avowed to be — to steal a march on our 
American dependencies. Whether the Confederates separate 
finally, or for the present yield ; whether the North retain 
that democratic constitution, which is hardly probable, or 
convert it into a more military and irresponsible form, the 
unscrupulous and uncalculating clamour of the Federals will 
be for war with us, and their bands of condottieri, now inur- 
ing to recklessness and rapine, will be let loose on our neigh- 
bouring provinces. Their habit is to contemplate war with 
England, not as a defence of right, or a punishing of wrong, 
but as opportunity for conquest and spoliation, and, when 
it suits their convenience, a pretext is never wanting. The 
island of San Juan, as the more ready facility, is at present 
held in retento ; but if any doubt attaches to the claim of 
either party to it, let it, at every risk, remain unpossessed, 
and unoccupied. ISTo reliance can be placed on such a 
people, and this is one valuable lesson of wise precaution, 
which the late stormy and astounding events in the New 
World — by disclosing more effectually to us their real cha- 
racter — has impressed upon us. But " fore- warned" is 
alone not " fore-armed f defensive measures should be 
taken with completeness and celerity, as if we were in full 
view of a vigorous and uncompromising warfare. Properly 
prepared, we have nothing to fear from this hectoring race of 
people who will never rest till they have disabused themselves 
of the arrogant idea that we are afraid of them ; and until 
they have provoked, and fatally experienced, what they now 
affect to undervalue — the full might of the hostility of the 
British Empire. 

Some may think that the foregoing remarks on American 



29 



affairs contain epithets and expressions which might better 
been have omitted. Silence, panegyric, even " cousin" 
caresses, have been fruitlessly tried, to woo back to us the 
filial kindness and duty of our kindred. I have stated 
nothing but what I believe to be fact, or fair inference, and, 
if this be the case, I see no reason why we should be more 
chary in our expressions, or more mincing in our gait, be- 
fore America, than towards other nations whose doings, 
when we deem them ignoble or unjust, we never spare to 
reprobate. Moreover, outspeaking is an attribute of which 
the Yankee republic, its great exemplar, ought to be the 
last to complain. There may be other critics, who would 
interpret these sentiments into those of " aristocrats" — pro- 
moters of war — lovers of slavery — haters of democracy. 
Democracy we do indeed hate, if it be, as in America, a 
name for far worse — a subterfuge for the most rampant 
tyranny. We love the utmost freedom, civil and reli- 
gious, that man can enjoy and attain. "We hate all 
despotism, whether of mobs, majorities, or monarchs — 
all hypocrisy and injustice, whether in North or South, 
" down-East," or "up- West." We do not think it either 
honourable or prudent tamely to yield to pretension 
and encroachment, bat more dignified and safe, boldly 
to confront and resist them. It is surely full time 
for men to reason unreservedly on the grand issues of na- 
tional events, without being whirled about on the eddies of 
party strife, without becoming obnoxious to hostile person- 
alities. Shame to think that our charity is so contracted, 
our respect for the honesty and judgment of our fellow- 
men is so soiled and perverted, that we cannot allow our- 
selves even to imagine a man glancing at any particular 
question, except in the interests of faction. We feel deeply 
for America, weltering in the slougliof misery and passion, 



into which she has wantonly and obstinately plunged her 
self. But we must feel, and speak too, for ourselves. Let 
her tread the path of moderation, equity, and honour, and 
England, who neither fears nor envies her, will cordiall; 
welcome her to confidence and respect. 



ARTHUR KING AND COMPANY, PIUNIliKS, BROAD STREET, ABERDEEN. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2010 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIONS PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 1 6066 
(724)779-2111 



